Make all stats useful for all chars

[chequers]

Strength (encumbrance, melee damage) and Dexterity (EV, stealth) are useful on all characters, but Intelligence (spellpower/success/hunger) isn't. It's completely useless on Be, which is probably fine given Trog is explicitly "no magic" but on GrFi it'll be useful only very late in the game if I bother to learn repel missiles/swiftness for the orb run.

I'd like to change this, by making Intelligence useful for all characters, in the minimally affecting way that Str and Dex can be. Some ideas:
* 1 int = +1 MR (problems: massive MR boost in early game to certain combos)
* Int affects evocation success/strength (problems: ???, changes Ar/Nem radically)

What do people think of the rationale, and the possible ideas?

[elmdor]

I've often wished that the game had a skill you could train to marginally increase MR+. Just like high Dex helps evasion, maybe higher Int could be the determining stat for the skill. No idea what it could be called though.

[Arrhythmia]

I've often wished that the game had a skill you could train to marginally increase MR+. Just like high Dex helps evasion, maybe higher Int could be the determining stat for the skill. No idea what it could be called though.

it's called XL

[johlstei]

Dex isn't very useful for characters in GDA - gargoyles are fine at spellcasting and you are free to pump int and hybridize earlier.

[archaeo]

Serious question: could you just remove stats and key everything the character does off of XL and skills?

[xentronium]

Well, intelligence does give you a buffer against stat zero effects as a Be. Now that potion of restore abilities is gone, it might matter a little more.

[Sprucery]

Serious question: could you just remove stats and key everything the character does off of XL and skills?

Please don't streamline the game into oblivion.

I'm all for making Int useful for all. The problem is that can be it done so that it would actually matter. If it was "+1 Int = a marginal increase in MR", for example, would any GrFi realistically ever choose Int over Str or Dex? If the increase was substantial, it would be too good for casters.

Int affecting evocations in some way could be interesting. It would be a nerf for Be, which is not necessarily a bad thing.

[chequers]

In general, people skill stats the same way they emphasize skills already, so I'm not sure removing stats would "streamlining the game into oblivion". However the work is really extensive so don't hold your breath anyone will do it (I'm not keen to).

[Wahaha]

Why should int be useful for all characters, that is, characters that don't cast spells? I don't think there's a problem here.

[Sar]

Followers of one god (a very strong and popular god, yes) don't benefit from one stat. Is that really that much of a problem?

I'd rather seen stat effects made more clear (and possibly expanded). Something like "This armour has a penalty of X, your Strength reduces it by Y", "Your Strength greatly adds in your attacks" maybe. Str is the stat with the most opaque influence on the game.

[Sprucery]

Well, I don't think there's any problem either, but making stat selection more interesting (more reasonable options -> interesting decision) would be a good thing imo.

Making stat effects more clear would of course be a good thing too.

[jejorda2]

The problem is that stats and skills are just two different ways to improve spellpower, melee damage, and evasion.

If spellcasting skill never decreased spell hunger and intelligence never increased spellpower, then builds that focused on intelligence, spellcasting skills, or both would play differently. As it is, stats and skills largely substitute for one another, so you don't really give up anything completely in the long run for having a low stat in some area.

[archaeo]

Please don't streamline the game into oblivion.

I was actually looking for a real defense of having stats, not a crawlitics broadside.

I see them doing relatively few things in the game. First, there's broad species differentiation, though stats are a distant third behind aptitudes and mutations. Stats also form the basis of Chei's major benefit, and moving that over to skill bonuses would step on Ash's toes. Then there are the artefact properties, which recent development has made more important than ever before. (Edited to add: obviously, stats have a bunch of other effects, but these are the only three I could think of where stats accomplish something that couldn't easily be covered by skill levels, more or less.)

You could solve all of these problems; species with big stat swings could get mutation/aptitude adjustments, Chei could give similar bonuses, and many of the Str/Int/Dex artefact properties could be redesigned. As chequers says, though, it'd be a major overhaul that no one wants to do, like all of the sweeping changes I like. Alas!

Making stat effects more clear would of course be a good thing too.

At one point, wasn't there a proposal to effectively cut stats in half while doubling the effect of each individual point? Losing a bit of granularity in exchange for clarity doesn't seem like a bad idea.

Otherwise, I feel like making every stat choice "interesting" would be a real uphill battle. I think the only way you could accomplish it would be to expand the reach and impact of every stat, and then make the changes far less opaque; the decisions would have to feel meaningful and character-defining, instead of an added bit of bookkeeping. This seems like an even more troublesome errand than removing them entirely.

The easiest thing to do, naturally, is to just tweak the status quo and accept stats as a vestigial mechanic we're retaining because no dev wants to go to the trouble to rewrite half the game. Maybe start a kickstarter to hire a programmer for a few months? I think gammafunk's looking for a job.

[bcadren]

Now that potion of restore abilities is gone, it might matter a little more.

I can't believe it; they buffed mummies.

[Sprucery]

I was actually looking for a real defense of having stats

Crawl has been developed for about 20 years with stats. It works well with them. Now the real question is, what would you gain by removing stats?

I think removing stats would make for a more boring game, not more interesting.

[dpeg]

Strength (encumbrance, melee damage) and Dexterity (EV, stealth) are useful on all characters, but Intelligence (spellpower/success/hunger) isn't. It's completely useless on Be, which is probably fine given Trog is explicitly "no magic" but on GrFi it'll be useful only very late in the game if I bother to learn repel missiles/swiftness for the orb run.

I'd like to change this, by making Intelligence useful for all characters, in the minimally affecting way that Str and Dex can be. Some ideas:
* 1 int = +1 MR (problems: massive MR boost in early game to certain combos)
* Int affects evocation success/strength (problems: ???, changes Ar/Nem radically)

What do people think of the rationale, and the possible ideas?

I think that puts the cart before the horse. As I see it: no stat is always useless. True, some characters will focus one just one stat (so have no decisions in that regard) but otherwise there is some tension. Int has a well-defined effect, and while it "only" deals with spellcasting, spells are relevant for very many characters -- in principle, everyone but Trog followers. In other words, I don't think the goal should be to make all stats relevant for all characters. Rather, we should be concerned if one stat is never, or very rarely, relevant for anyone. I don't think that's the case right now.

Stats have been made more relevant in the past few versions, and while more granularity would probably help, they're not in a shabby state, I'd say. (The fact that Cheibriados stat gains are good for something is an indicator they're decently relevant, for example.)

[Berder]

Now that potion of restore abilities is gone, it might matter a little more.

I can't believe it; they buffed mummies.

Except before, mummies could just rest off all stat drain and now they can't do that anymore. So it may not be a strict buff.

[duvessa]

I was actually looking for a real defense of having stats

Crawl has been developed for about 20 years with stats. It works well with them.

Crawl was developed for about 17 years with Evaporate and Fulsome Distillation, and worked well with them. Yet nearly every designer agrees they were bad for the game, and they were removed. Just because the feature can exist without completely destroying the game doesn't mean it's a good feature. I mean, the entire premise of this thread is that at least one stat doesn't work right now!

[chequers]

For what it's worth, I'm dropping my original idea. The wide, wide range of int on characters makes it hard to add any effect to into that isn't a) overpowered on l1 dewz while also b) non-trivial on a l27 ghfi.

The idea of pulling stats entirely out of the game is one I'm really excited by, for all the reasons detailed up thread but especially because their current implementation is a coarse, inflexible version of skill XP. But you would need to do a whole lot of upfront work to prove to the dev team it's a good idea/viable and even then it may get kiboshed later anyhow.

[Sprucery]

I mean, the entire premise of this thread is that at least one stat doesn't work right now!

No, it is that one stat isn't useful to all characters. Fixing that by removing stats would be strange. Int works quite nicely in what it's supposed to do.

Also I don't think you can compare having stats to having Fulsome Distillation and Evaporate. (And because those spells were evaluated (by devs) as being bad to the game, you can't really say that Crawl 'worked well' with them.)

The idea of pulling stats entirely out of the game is one I'm really excited by, for all the reasons detailed up thread but especially because their current implementation is a coarse, inflexible version of skill XP.

In what way would Crawl be better without stats?

[sanka]

The thing I really do not like about stats is that strength (low strength) seriously limits armour choices, and while armour choices would be interesting (for me) stat choice on level up is not.

[Sar]

So some people dislike Strength because it isn't important enough and some people dislike it because it is too important?

[dpeg]

Sar: Yes! The conundrum of public discussions.

There will be no concensus ever in these threads, but one can try to understand the opinions of others, and occasionally pick up ideas.

[archaeo]

Also I don't think you can compare having stats to having Fulsome Distillation and Evaporate.

The point isn't that they're precisely equivalent, it's that longevity isn't a great defense. Bad mechanics stick around for years for all kinds of reasons.

In what way would Crawl be better without stats?

In the same way it was better when they removed elven and dwarven equipment: in general, stats are a distracting presence that often appear more useful and relevant than they really are, especially since they're hanging in permanent view in your HUD. They're opaque numbers that require some detailed spoilers to actually understand, and for ~*~optimal~*~ play, understanding feels like a requirement. While they can be impactful, it's usually only when you're talking about relatively large stat boosts or drains, both of which could be modeled differently. In other words, the game would be better without them because it's an effective bit of "streamlining." Even at their best, stats still do nothing that couldn't be done better with mechanics that are easier to understand and more fun to use.

I still haven't really seen a good response to my original question, though. What does Crawl gain from having stats? Why would removing them harm the game?

[njvack]

Stats give players a little choice to make every few levels (which feels nice); they're some of the very few choices in character development for which there's no straightforward way to undo a decision.

Stats give a visual indication of character advancement.

Stats act as a balancing and differentiation technique for backgrounds.

Stats are something that can be boosted or reduced by gear, mutations, and divine power. The fact that Chei speed runs are a thing suggests that their impact is fairly important.

IMO, they're not particularly opaque. Dex helps with dodging. Str helps with hitting things and heavy armour. Int helps with magic. Yes, maybe those things could be better explained (and yes, they're more complex that that), but knowing those general guidelines is enough to win with.

I'm generally all about simplifying Crawl, but I think stats are a good part of it.

[Sandman25]

Stat effect is underestimated by some players, compare fsim for melee with Str 10 and Str 40, damage from spells for GhIE of Ashenzari and DEIE of Chei, EV for GhGl and MfGl in light armour.

[archaeo]

I'm generally all about simplifying Crawl, but I think stats are a good part of it.

I'm not like, 100% convinced that stats need to be removed either. But if they're going to be retained (and since it's the status quo, they probably will), they certainly need some clarification and tightening, in my view.

That said, nothing on your list can't be accomplished just as well with XL, skills, species mutations, and alternative item/god properties, I imagine, and I get the distinct feeling that all of those would improve clarity. I have a harder time thinking of ways you can make stats more clear, especially since they never impact just one thing, but a whole bunch of things, many of them almost impossible to notice in play.

[Sandman25]

That said, nothing on your list can't be accomplished just as well with XL, skills, species mutations, and alternative item/god properties, I imagine, and I get the distinct feeling that all of those would improve clarity.

It depends on whether we want DEWz to have higher spell power than DEFi who learned the same spells and trained magic skills to the same levels.

[njvack]

Actually, that's the thing that bothers me most about stats: They're the only significant part of your background you can never leave behind*. The purist in me feels that your background should be 100% starting kit and that it should have no permanent impact on your character.

[archaeo]

It depends on whether we want DEWz to have higher spell power than DEFi who learned the same spells and trained magic skills to the same levels.

Even this could probably be rearranged to work with non-stat bonuses; you could always give an apt boost via background, for example, if maintaining this distinction was desirable. I don't really mind either way, though, as I feel like a DEFi that trains a bunch of magic skills probably should be just as good a spellcaster.

[dowan]

Actually, that's the thing that bothers me most about stats: They're the only significant part of your background you can never leave behind*. The purist in me feels that your background should be 100% starting kit and that it should have no permanent impact on your character.

Stats also differentiate the races, and I think it's a good thing that a DE with 36 int and 20 conjurations casts a more powerful spell than a troll with 5 int and 20 conjurations.

I wouldn't mind if background stat modifications were dropped, but I also don't mind them existing

[Siegurt]

The problem with taking away stats and replacing all the stat-related racial bonuses with mutations (Or whatever you want to call the new thing that replaces those bonuses) is that suddenly you have to maintain a whole additional set stat-mimicing mutations, and if they use the existing mutation mechanic, they have less granularity than stats do. If they *don't* use the existing mutation mechanic, then you have to add a whole different mechanic, which replaces stats, which doesn't simplify anything at all.

The alternative is to simply not have races be distinguished by things like "this race is better at spells than that race, even training everything to max" if there wasn't a cap to skills, aptitude would be an acceptable distinction, but there is, so it's not. (Yes, I suppose races could have different skill caps, good luck on getting that level of structural change implemented

If you take away the distinction entirely, then you have less possible racial variation, and therefore less races, and thereby less replayability, (Which isn't horrible, but honestly this strikes me as a solution looking for a problem) Yes simplification of the game where complication adds nothing is a good thing, however in this case having stats gives us an axis around which we can build distinction between characters, and god(s) (I guess chei could come up with an entirely new mechanic, or simply be retired) and between artifacts, (but honestly artifacts are already pretty distinctive, they could probably withstand the loss of stat boosting without too much 'samey-ness' being introduced) If you remove the axis you can either replace it, or reduce your distinctiveness.

To simplify it while replacing it and retaining the level of variation it gives, you'd have to come up with a system that is simpler than a *single number*, you could reduce the variation to simplify it, but this is the same as retaining stats and just increasing their granularity; If there's a "is better/worse with spells" mutation to replace int using the current mutation mechanic , then that's exactly the same as reducing Int to a scale of 7 (-3 through +3) from it's current scale.

At that point the argument is "Stats shouldn't be shown in the on screen display area" which is a different argument altogether.

[Sprucery]

Actually, that's the thing that bothers me most about stats: They're the only significant part of your background you can never leave behind*. The purist in me feels that your background should be 100% starting kit and that it should have no permanent impact on your character.

Well, I for one really like that backgrounds affect stats. Having race+background combinations differ by more than starting equipment adds replayability imo.

[Sandman25]

Also let's not forget about +9 stats which are selected by player during levelups. Enchanter with +9 Int is really different from Enchanter with +9 Dex.

Edit. Also Jiyva with its stats change.

[tasonir]

(I guess chei could come up with an entirely new mechanic, or simply be retired)

Throwing out the baby with the bathwater here

IMHO stats are a great system that works really well, and are pretty elegant. Gaining +15 to all stats from chei has a powerful effect on a character in all areas, which shows that stats do in fact work to boost all aspects of your character. Sure +1 isn't huge, but it isn't meant to be, and over the course of a game getting to assign 9 points does make a big difference. I remember learning way back when that your MiFi should probably take +9 dex level ups rather than +9 str and finding it very interesting. It may not be obvious to newbies who might associate fighters with strength more than dexterity, but that's not that big of a problem imho.

Strength used to be a very distant third stat, and while it's probably still third for most characters, it's now fairly close to dex/int, so it's at least on the right order of magnitude. I've picked strength on level ups a couple of times, although I generally don't ever take +9 str on a character. It could possibly be buffed slightly more, but I'm not sure I can think of a good way to do so.

In short stat balance is pretty good, they are impactful, and shuffling their impact to another system doesn't seem like it'd gain you much of anything.

[all before]

Stats also differentiate the races, and I think it's a good thing that a DE with 36 int and 20 conjurations casts a more powerful spell than a troll with 5 int and 20 conjurations.

Consider that at some point additional skill investment will overtake stat bonus, so for example let's say the troll needs 27 conj to cast with equal spell power to the deep elf at 20 conj. (The actual numbers don't really matter.) In that case, why not just have races be differentiated by skill aptitudes?

[Sandman25]

Stats also differentiate the races, and I think it's a good thing that a DE with 36 int and 20 conjurations casts a more powerful spell than a troll with 5 int and 20 conjurations.

Consider that at some point additional skill investment will overtake stat bonus, so for example let's say the troll needs 27 conj to cast with equal spell power to the deep elf at 20 conj. (The actual numbers don't really matter.) In that case, why not just have races be differentiated by skill aptitudes?

Intelligence is multiplied by average of magic schools so if DE has Int 40 and Conjurations 20, the Troll with Intelligence 20 would need to have Conjurations 40 which is impossible. Also Intelligence is very important for level 9 spells since even with Intelligence 30 and 27 skills in corresponding magic school the spell will have higher than 1% failure. With low intelligence high level spells are merely uncastable.

[johlstei]

Actually, that's the thing that bothers me most about stats: They're the only significant part of your background you can never leave behind*. The purist in me feels that your background should be 100% starting kit and that it should have no permanent impact on your character.

Stats also differentiate the races, and I think it's a good thing that a DE with 36 int and 20 conjurations casts a more powerful spell than a troll with 5 int and 20 conjurations.

I wouldn't mind if background stat modifications were dropped, but I also don't mind them existing

Aptitudes do this just fine - a troll with 20 conjurations had to put way more XP in to get the same effect as a deep elf, at that point they've "earned" strong spells despite the racial handicap.

[all before]

If stats are going to be kept, I at least wish that what they did be more focused and more clear. Like, I think it would be an improvement if dex were a dodging bonus (or even a bonus to dodging, ac, and shields), str were a bonus to hitting things with weapons, and int a bonus to casting spells. That would make stats less spoilery--clearer to new players which stats they should invest in for which characters. Of course, it also makes stats more obviously redundant with skills...

[XuaXua]

make stats less spoilery--clearer to new players which stats they should invest in for which characters.

Much of this can be resolved by having the game manual provide a less vague list of what each Attribute does.

Searching on "Strength", "Dexterity" and "Intelligence", here is all the relevant information that the REST Manual currently says about each (make sure to scroll down):

  Code:

Strength
  Abbreviated to "Str". Increases your effectiveness with melee and ranged
  weapons. Affects your ability to use heavy armours and shields effectively.

Intelligence
  Abbreviated to "Int". Affects how well you can cast spells as well as how much
  nutrition spellcasting takes.

Dexterity
  Abbreviated to "Dex". Somewhat increases your effectiveness with melee and
  ranged weapons. Significantly affects your ability to dodge attacks aimed
  at you, your general effectiveness with shields, your stealth, and your
  effectiveness when stabbing unaware enemies.

...
Armour
...

Wearing heavy armour also increases your chances of miscasting spells, an effect which is only slightly
reduced by your Armour skill. These penalties are smaller if you have a high
Armour skill, but larger if you have low Strength.

...
Potions
...

Agi
  You are unnaturally agile. This provides bonuses to your dexterity, evasion,
  and stealth.

Brill
  You are unnaturally smart. This provides bonuses to your intelligence,
  spellcasting success, & spellpower.

Might
  You are unnaturally strong. This provides bonuses to your strength & damage
  in physical combat.

...
Brainless, Clumsy, Collapse
  One of your attributes (Intelligence, Dexterity, or Strength, respectively)
  has fallen to 0. You suffer extreme penalties to most actions related to
  the specific attribute. Increasing the attribute above 0 will cause the status
  to go away in a few turns.

...
Spellcasting
...

When casting a spell, you temporarily expend some of your magical energy and
become hungrier (although high intelligence and Spellcasting help against hunger
from spells).

...
Your chance of failing to cast a spell properly depends on your skills, your
intelligence, the level of the spell and whether you are wearing heavy armour.

...
Stealth
...

  It is affected by your species, dexterity, Stealth skill, and the encumbrance
  of your body armour.



[Sandman25]

You reached level 15. Which stat to increase?
(S)trength (+3.1% damage), (I)ntelligence (+3% spell power), (D)exterity (+0.6 EV)
...
You reached level 18. Which stat to increase?
(S)trength (+2.5% damage), (I)ntelligence (+3% spell power), (D)exterity (+0.5 EV)

This takes into account currently wielded weapon and current skills.

[Siegurt]

You reached level 15. Which stat to increase?
(S)trength (+3.1% damage), (I)ntelligence (+3% spell power), (D)exterity (+0.6 EV)
...
You reached level 18. Which stat to increase?
(S)trength (+2.5% damage), (I)ntelligence (+3% spell power), (D)exterity (+0.5 EV)

This takes into account currently wielded weapon and current skills.

Well, except that under the current system that overly simplifies things (Strength can be a larger bump to EV than dex depending on what body armour you're wearing and what your current penalties are, even if you extracted those numbers and displayed them, they wouldn't be accurate if you changed gear.)

Similarly for spell success with Str/Int

I'm not sure displaying sometimes inaccurate, inconsistent, or misleading numbers is the best way to go.

[Sprucery]

Also I don't think you can compare having stats to having Fulsome Distillation and Evaporate.

The point isn't that they're precisely equivalent, it's that longevity isn't a great defense. Bad mechanics stick around for years for all kinds of reasons.

I'm really surprised that I have to explain this, but the defense wasn't longevity but the fact that Crawl has been developed as having stats. They affect many things in the game and removing them is thus a completely different thing than removing a couple of spells.

You still haven't proven that stats are "bad mechanics".

[johlstei]

Also I don't think you can compare having stats to having Fulsome Distillation and Evaporate.

The point isn't that they're precisely equivalent, it's that longevity isn't a great defense. Bad mechanics stick around for years for all kinds of reasons.

I'm really surprised that I have to explain this, but the defense wasn't longevity but the fact that Crawl has been developed as having stats. They affect many things in the game and removing them is thus a completely different thing than removing a couple of spells.

You still haven't proven that stats are "bad mechanics".

It was developed with an XP pool as well, probably the best comparison. Stats should be kept if stats result in a better game than no stats. History has nothing to do with it.

[duvessa]

Also I don't think you can compare having stats to having Fulsome Distillation and Evaporate.

The point isn't that they're precisely equivalent, it's that longevity isn't a great defense. Bad mechanics stick around for years for all kinds of reasons.

I'm really surprised that I have to explain this, but the defense wasn't longevity but the fact that Crawl has been developed as having stats. They affect many things in the game and removing them is thus a completely different thing than removing a couple of spells.

Deterministic energy (<0.6). Strength having no effect on spellcasting penalties (<0.6). Dex's effect on EV having a hard cap. Strategic spells (<0.6, <0.8). Very high-resolution knowledge of all monster positions in radius ~30 (<0.6). Ability to arbitrarily target out-of-LOS monster movement (<0.11). Carrying capacity (<0.15). Inventory destruction. Non-Wn background randomization. Many/most gods taking non-corpse sacrifices. Noise penetrating walls (<0.8). Using different geometries for LOS than for ranges and movement (<0.7). Using different geometries for LOS and ranges than for movement (<0.17).

[Sandman25]

- Let's remove movement.
- Movement affects many things, crawl was developed with movement in mind and it is 20 years old.
- So what, Evaporate was 17 years old.
- Don't you see difference? Removing movement is not the same as removing some spells.
- Longevity isn't a great defense.
- It is not about longevity. Crawl has been developed with movement in mind. It affects crawl in so many ways.
- There is a bunch of other effects which were removed in crawl (a long list).

People, can you read with your eyes? Are you non-native English speakers as well?

It's really simple:
1) List stat problems. Make sure they are actual problems, not just "effect of Str is not described completely in manual so I think all stats should be removed".
2) Propose a solution which does not make the problems from point 1 even worse or creates more serious problems
3) Make sure the proposed solution doesn't contradict to crawl philosophy.

[dowan]

Actually, that's the thing that bothers me most about stats: They're the only significant part of your background you can never leave behind*. The purist in me feels that your background should be 100% starting kit and that it should have no permanent impact on your character.

Stats also differentiate the races, and I think it's a good thing that a DE with 36 int and 20 conjurations casts a more powerful spell than a troll with 5 int and 20 conjurations.

I wouldn't mind if background stat modifications were dropped, but I also don't mind them existing

Aptitudes do this just fine - a troll with 20 conjurations had to put way more XP in to get the same effect as a deep elf, at that point they've "earned" strong spells despite the racial handicap.

OK, I can play a DE with 27 conj and spellcasting, and put all my lvl up points into dex, and then play another DE with the same skills, but all lvl up points in int. These characters will be somewhat different. If you remove stats, now all DEs are the same. All that matters is skill level, where currently int can make up for a lot of missing skill levels.

I just don't see what this proposed change accomplishes, beside making all characters more similar.

[johlstei]

Stat problems:
1. A complex mechanic that exists.
2. Misleadingly prominent on the main display

Some would disagree that complex mechanics are negative thing by nature. In my eyes they are, fundamentally. The game should be as easy to understand as possible, but no easier. Mechanics that don't appropriately add depth for how complex they are should be culled, any complex mechanic should only survive if it's worthwhile. To me this is universal - every mechanic should be considered for the chopping block and every mechanic should have a clearly defined purpose. I don't know if this applies to stats or not, I'm undecided, but it's a clear negative in that it's a complex thing in the game and as such needs to have a defined purpose or be removed. Having to justify removal of anything with this same argument is kind of tiring. Do you really think "a set of numbers that adjusts a grab-bag of character abilities in small ways" is as fundamental to crawl as moving?

[johlstei]

OK, I can play a DE with 27 conj and spellcasting, and put all my lvl up points into dex, and then play another DE with the same skills, but all lvl up points in int. These characters will be somewhat different. If you remove stats, now all DEs are the same. All that matters is skill level, where currently int can make up for a lot of missing skill levels.

I just don't see what this proposed change accomplishes, beside making all characters more similar.

This argument seems fully general. Those characters would not be very different. It'd be easy to make a proposal that adds more differentiation, it's just that the complexity involved in reasoning about them is unwarranted for what you gain.

Imagine there are 3 more stats now, wis, cha, and con. A point of end gives you roughly 1 hp, a point of wis makes your spellcasting a bit better, but not as much as int does, and makes your dodging a little better, but not as much as dex does. A point of cha gives you roughly 1% more piety with applicable gods, and a tiny bit of MR. Would you support adding this? It allows for more differentiation, but now you also have to reason about whether 2 wis is better than 1 dex and 1 int, which may be different in different contexts, and how important piety is to you, etc. It adds complex decisions for a very marginal effect. In my mind, stats as they exist may well be similar in that sense. Using your reasoning, we could never remove anything that technically added differentiation even if it was a large mental burden for a marginal benefit.

[Sprucery]

Stats should be kept if stats result in a better game than no stats.

I agree. But I haven't been convinced that the game would be better without stats. The burden of proof is on the side who wants to change the status quo.

@duvessa: I don't get the point. Many game mechanics have been changed over the years? Of course. I wouldn't have objected comparing stat removal to those changes. It's not like removing a couple of spells.

I also think that this is a fine discussion to have. If you can convince me that the game would be better without stats, I'll be all for it. But comments about how stats are obviously bad and can't they already be removed really baffle me.

Stat problems:
1. A complex mechanic that exists.
2. Misleadingly prominent on the main display

1. But would removing stats result in a simpler implementation while preserving all the variability that the game has with stats?
2. If something more important needs the space, they can surely be moved elsewhere. Otherwise I don't see the problem.